Human access constrains optimal foraging and habitat availability in an avian generalist

IF 4.3 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Nicholas M. Masto, Abigail G. Blake-Bradshaw, Cory J. Highway, Allison C. Keever, Jamie C. Feddersen, Heath M. Hagy, Bradley S. Cohen
{"title":"Human access constrains optimal foraging and habitat availability in an avian generalist","authors":"Nicholas M. Masto,&nbsp;Abigail G. Blake-Bradshaw,&nbsp;Cory J. Highway,&nbsp;Allison C. Keever,&nbsp;Jamie C. Feddersen,&nbsp;Heath M. Hagy,&nbsp;Bradley S. Cohen","doi":"10.1002/eap.2952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Animals balance costs of antipredator behaviors with resource acquisition to minimize hunting and other mortality risks and maximize their physiological condition. This inherent trade-off between forage abundance, its quality, and mortality risk is intensified in human-dominated landscapes because fragmentation, habitat loss, and degradation of natural vegetation communities is often coupled with artificially enhanced vegetation (i.e., food plots), creating high-risk, high-reward resource selection decisions. Our goal was to evaluate autumn–winter resource selection trade-offs for an intensively hunted avian generalist. We hypothesized human access was a reliable cue for hunting predation risk. Therefore, we predicted resource selection patterns would be spatiotemporally dependent upon levels of access and associated perceived risk. Specifically, we evaluated resource selection of local-scale flights between diel periods for 426 mallards (<i>Anas platyrhynchos</i>) relative to wetland type, forage quality, and differing levels of human access across hunting and nonhunting seasons. Mallards selected areas that prohibited human access and generally avoided areas that allowed access diurnally, especially during the hunting season. Mallards compensated by selecting for high-energy and greater quality foraging patches on allowable human access areas nocturnally when they were devoid of hunters. Postseason selection across human access gradients did not return to prehunting levels immediately, perhaps suggesting a delayed response to reacclimate to nonhunted activities and thus agreeing with the assessment mismatch hypothesis. Last, wetland availability and human access constrained selection for optimal natural forage quality (i.e., seed biomass and forage productivity) diurnally during preseason and hunting season, respectively; however, mallards were freed from these constraints nocturnally during hunting season and postseason periods. Our results suggest risk-avoidance of human accessible (i.e., hunted) areas is a primary driver of resource selection behaviors by mallards and could be a local to landscape-level process influencing distributions, instead of forage abundance and quality, which has long-been assumed by waterfowl conservation planners in North America. Broadly, even an avian generalist, well adapted to anthropogenic landscapes, avoids areas where hunting and human access are allowed. Future conservation planning and implementation must consider management for recreational access (i.e., people) equally important as foraging habitat management for wintering waterfowl.</p>","PeriodicalId":55168,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Applications","volume":"34 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Applications","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eap.2952","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Animals balance costs of antipredator behaviors with resource acquisition to minimize hunting and other mortality risks and maximize their physiological condition. This inherent trade-off between forage abundance, its quality, and mortality risk is intensified in human-dominated landscapes because fragmentation, habitat loss, and degradation of natural vegetation communities is often coupled with artificially enhanced vegetation (i.e., food plots), creating high-risk, high-reward resource selection decisions. Our goal was to evaluate autumn–winter resource selection trade-offs for an intensively hunted avian generalist. We hypothesized human access was a reliable cue for hunting predation risk. Therefore, we predicted resource selection patterns would be spatiotemporally dependent upon levels of access and associated perceived risk. Specifically, we evaluated resource selection of local-scale flights between diel periods for 426 mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) relative to wetland type, forage quality, and differing levels of human access across hunting and nonhunting seasons. Mallards selected areas that prohibited human access and generally avoided areas that allowed access diurnally, especially during the hunting season. Mallards compensated by selecting for high-energy and greater quality foraging patches on allowable human access areas nocturnally when they were devoid of hunters. Postseason selection across human access gradients did not return to prehunting levels immediately, perhaps suggesting a delayed response to reacclimate to nonhunted activities and thus agreeing with the assessment mismatch hypothesis. Last, wetland availability and human access constrained selection for optimal natural forage quality (i.e., seed biomass and forage productivity) diurnally during preseason and hunting season, respectively; however, mallards were freed from these constraints nocturnally during hunting season and postseason periods. Our results suggest risk-avoidance of human accessible (i.e., hunted) areas is a primary driver of resource selection behaviors by mallards and could be a local to landscape-level process influencing distributions, instead of forage abundance and quality, which has long-been assumed by waterfowl conservation planners in North America. Broadly, even an avian generalist, well adapted to anthropogenic landscapes, avoids areas where hunting and human access are allowed. Future conservation planning and implementation must consider management for recreational access (i.e., people) equally important as foraging habitat management for wintering waterfowl.

人类的进入限制了鸟类的最佳觅食和栖息地的可用性。
动物在反捕食行为与获取资源之间权衡成本,以最大限度地降低捕猎和其他死亡风险,并最大限度地改善其生理状况。由于自然植被群落的破碎化、栖息地丧失和退化往往与人工强化植被(即食物地块)相结合,造成了高风险、高回报的资源选择决策,因此在人类占主导地位的景观中,这种在饲料丰度、饲料质量和死亡风险之间的固有权衡更加激烈。我们的目标是评估一种密集捕猎的鸟类通才的秋冬资源选择权衡。我们假设人类的进入是狩猎捕食风险的可靠线索。因此,我们预测资源选择模式在时空上取决于人类进入的程度和相关的感知风险。具体来说,我们评估了426只野鸭(Anas platyrhynchos)在狩猎季和非狩猎季期间,根据湿地类型、饲料质量以及不同的人类进入水平,在昼夜间进行的局部范围飞行的资源选择。野鸭会选择禁止人类进入的区域,而通常会避开允许人类进入的区域,尤其是在狩猎季节。野鸭在夜间没有狩猎者时会选择允许人类进入的区域中的高能量和更高质量的觅食斑块,从而弥补了这一不足。狩猎季节结束后,野鸭对人类出入梯度的选择并没有立即恢复到狩猎前的水平,这可能表明野鸭对重新适应非狩猎活动的反应是延迟的,从而与评估不匹配假说相吻合。最后,湿地的可利用性和人类的进入分别限制了野鸭对最佳自然饲料质量(即种子生物量和饲料生产力)的昼间选择;然而,野鸭在狩猎季节和狩猎季节后的夜间却摆脱了这些限制。我们的研究结果表明,对人类可进入区域(即狩猎区)的风险规避是野鸭资源选择行为的主要驱动因素,并且可能是影响野鸭分布的一个局部到景观水平的过程,而不是北美水禽保护规划者长期以来所假设的饲料丰度和质量。从广义上讲,即使是非常适应人为景观的鸟类通性动物,也会避开允许狩猎和人类进入的区域。未来的保护规划和实施必须考虑到娱乐活动(即人类)的管理与越冬水禽的觅食栖息地管理同等重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecological Applications
Ecological Applications 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
2.00%
发文量
268
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The pages of Ecological Applications are open to research and discussion papers that integrate ecological science and concepts with their application and implications. Of special interest are papers that develop the basic scientific principles on which environmental decision-making should rest, and those that discuss the application of ecological concepts to environmental problem solving, policy, and management. Papers that deal explicitly with policy matters are welcome. Interdisciplinary approaches are encouraged, as are short communications on emerging environmental challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信